Welcome to the School of Social Engineering

Share

The views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect the editorial opinion of The Christian Post or its editors.

In the wake of the controversial dismissal of Green Jobs Czar Van Jones, another of the President's men has been attracting negative attention.

The President has chosen teacher and GLBT activist Kevin Jennings for advice and guidance on how best to foster a safe and drug-free environment for America's school children. Much has already been written about Jennings's controversial background, his troubling associations, his questionable ethics, and his obvious lack of qualification and suitability for the job of Safe Schools Czar. Given Obama's need to stay in the public's good graces in order to advance the cause of health care reform, it would hardly be surprising to see Kevin Jennings gently shoved off the President's roster of advisors if this criticism continues.

What the American people are beginning to realize-thanks to appointees like Van Jones and Kevin Jennings-is that the President's vision for the country involves far more than making health care accessible to all or reducing our collective carbon footprint. True to his promise to bring about "change," Mr. Obama is aggressively pursuing a comprehensive policy of social engineering designed to do just that.

And he is using America's schools as an instrument to produce that change.

Ostensibly, Mr. Jennings was selected as Director of the Office for Safe and Drug-Free Schools due to his work in addressing the problem of bullying-a worthy and necessary effort to be sure. Many children feel unsafe at school due to systematic harassment and violence at the hands of their peers. What's revealing, however, is that-despite little evidence to suggest that the bullying of gay kids in particular is a pervasive problem-Mr. Jennings' principal criteria in evaluating the "safety" of a school appears to be the extent to which that school is a supporter and advocate of homosexuality and other alternative sexual orientations.

With Mr. Jones, the President attempted to advance his controversial agenda by appointing an individual of dubious qualifications to head up a noble-sounding effort. "Green jobs" was a pretext for advancing a divisive and partisan "social justice" agenda. With Kevin Jennings, "safe schools" turns out to be a euphemism for the advancement and promotion of the GLBT agenda. Were Mr. Jennings truly concerned with addressing the problem of bullying in school he might focus on developing programs that emphasize the basic precept of the Golden Rule: Treat others as you would wish to be treated. Do not do violence to others for any reason. Be tolerant of others, even those with whom you disagree. Such a program would work to increase the safety and security of all children, including those struggling with GLBT issues.

It appears that the true purpose of the Safe Schools Czar, then, is not to reduce instances of bullying in schools but to normalize alternative sexual identities and practices through a systematic program of indoctrination in the classroom. Recognizing the truth of Abraham Lincoln's observation that "the philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next," Mr. Obama knows that the best way to achieve his larger "progressive" vision of eradicating all traces of outmoded moral convention from the American social consciousness is to start with the children.

As far as Mr. Jennings is concerned, the moral validity of homosexuality is self-evident; it is as indisputable as the roundness of the earth or the sum of two and two. The fact that approximately 50% of the American people believe that homosexuality is immoral merely confirms to Jennings the importance of his mission and the necessity of his schoolroom strategy. Just as it's necessary to prohibit Christmas cards and prayer in school in order to preserve the radicals' vision of the separation of Church and State, so too is it necessary to advance the views of homosexuals by ensuring that every American child is educated about the scope and variety of their sexual options in life. It counts for nothing that most parents would object to their children being made unwitting dupes of a social agenda they find morally-objectionable and antagonistic to their religious views and notions of the traditional family. Hijacking the classroom, however, is key to advancing the GLBT agenda.

With each passing day, it's becoming increasingly clear that the change the American people voted for is not the "change" President Obama envisions for our country. It remains to be seen, however, whether the American people are prepared to compromise their children's education in service of Mr. Obama's vision of the future. If the answer is no, then it may well be that Mr. Jennings isn't the only one whose days are numbered.